NASA and other space scientists are totally obsessed with finding life in outer space. Virtually every rover sent to Mars has included experiments designed specifically to search for signs of life. And the space telescopes that are currently scanning the cosmos are often used to search for signs of life in exoplanets that are orbiting stars out in space.
I actually come across articles quite often that speculate about life on other planets. A recent one is entitled: Scientists Find Strongest Evidence Yet of Life on Alien Planet. (You can read the article at: https://www.newsmax.com/scitech/james-webb-space-telescope-k2-18-b-exoplanet/2025/04/16/id/1207201/ – It is also reported on by Reuters, The Guardian, BBC, CNN, New Scientist, AOL, and on and on.)
In this case, the James Webb Space Telescope detected what scientists are deeming “the strongest signs yet of possible life beyond our solar system. What it detected is “the chemical fingerprints of gasses that on Earth are produced in the planet’s atmosphere only by biological processes.” The particular chemicals they have detected are dimethyl sulfide (DMS) and dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) on a planet named K2-18B. This planet is located about 124 light years from earth in the constellation Leo. Indications are that this planet exists in the habitable zone around its star where liquid water is possible.
While advising caution, about making definitive statements concerning the existence of life out in the cosmos (they always have to put in a disclaimer because they can’t tell anything definitively), many scientists are convinced that what they have discovered is a sign of life. They believe this planet “may be teeming with microbial life.” (Note carefully the use of the words “may be” as another disclaimer.)
Once again the question emerges, “Why this obsession with finding signs of life in outer space?” Well the answer is quite simple. While many claim that this is merely a matter of scientific curiosity, it is actually something else entirely. These people are mostly committed Atheists who don’t believe in God and are totally convinced in their minds that the existence of life in the universe had to have emerged based on natural processes. As a result, they are determined to find scientific evidence that it is possible for life to have come into being by natural means.
While they may claim their interest is simply scientific curiosity, the truth is, they are trying with all their might to give evidence for their religious beliefs. Their obsession with finding life outside of Earth is a religious quest, not a scientific one. They don’t believe in God, and are looking for anything they can find to show that God was not necessary for life to have appeared in the natural universe.
For the most part, these folks would be furious with me for saying their quest is religious. In fact, most of them would argue that they are not religious at all – that they only believe in science.
That is not true, however. First of all, science is not a belief system, it is a methodology. People can’t believe in science as a belief system. Then, when you look at what would be necessary for life to have a natural origin, it becomes evident very quickly that there is no science behind what these people are asserting. So just what would be necessary?
1. The material that makes up the natural universe would have to have a natural source.
2. Life would have to emerge out of non-life.
3. Less complex life forms would have to evolve into more complex forms.
4. Consciousness would have to emerge from non-consciousness.
Looking at these, the question must be asked, “Where is the science that demonstrates that any of these things are even possible?” And the answer is, “There is NONE!” People who believe these four things must believe them purely by faith.
“But faith in what?” you might ask. Well, it is not faith in science, as science has no answers to any of the four necessary elements. Rather, it is faith in the assumptions of naturalistic philosophy. They believe that the natural universe, operating by natural laws, is all that exists, and they are spending many billions of dollars trying to prove their belief. But naturalistic philosophy is simply not true.
But even with that, these folks don’t give up. They come right back and say, “There is no evidence that God exists, so seeking a scientific answer is legitimate.”
So, what do they mean by that? They don’t really mean “there is no evidence.” What they mean is that there is no empirical proof that God exists. Interesting that they demand empirical proof for the existence of God (who is not subject to empirical proof), while not demanding it for their own beliefs which actually requires it.
While there is no empirical proof for God’s existence, there is VERY powerful evidence. Since God actually does exist, and we were created “in His image” as persons with a spiritual essence, we can interact with Him in a personal relationship, and as we engage that relationship, we can KNOW He exists.
There is life outside of the Earth, but it is not space alien life. God does exist and we can know Him.